Loyal council tables fluoridation issue

By Valorie Brecht After once again hearing from concerned citizens and health officials at its latest meeting, the Loyal Common Council opted to table the issue of fluoridating city water, due to a couple of council members being gone and wanting to have input from the full council before making a decision. Citizens may view future city council agendas to see when fluoridation is listed again as an agenda item.

Although they did not take action on fluoridation, the council heard from five citizens who spoke both for and against it, most of whom also spoke at the December council meeting when the issue was last discussed.

Context The issue has become a hot-button topic on the national stage and more locally recently. U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy on April 7 announced his intention to direct the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to stop recommending fluoride in drinking water in communities nationwide. This decision follows Utah’s recent ban on fluoride in public water systems, making it the first state to do so.

Here in Wisconsin, as of Feb. 4, the city of DeForest voted to discontinue fluoride treatment in its water, joining 77 other communities in the state, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports. Thirty-eight percent of those communities have made this decision since 2020.

Nearby, Marathon County’s Health and Human Services Committee recently rejected a resolution that would have urged local municipalities to reduce their water fluoridation level to 0.15 mg/L (also referred to as parts per million or ppm) or less, which is well below the U.S. Public Health Service’s “optimal” fluoridation level of 0.7 mg/L. Those who voted against the resolution said they felt it was not their place as a county to be telling individual municipalities what to do; they could make that decision on their own. The communities of Stratford, Mosinee, Hatley, and Schofield do not fluoridate their water.

Against fluoridation During public comment at the Loyal council meeting April 15, Loyal resident Donna Milz, who has spoken at previous meetings, reiterated her concerns about negative health effects from fluoride. She uses a water filtration system in her home to remove the fluoride from city water.

“Any of you who know me know I’m passionate about kids and their wellbeing. Fluoride is a neurotoxin that crosses the blood-brain barrier and accumulates in the brain. Harvard Research found that it can reduce a child’s IQ by 5 to 10 points, and that’s published science that we don’t hear about, but you can Google Harvard Research and find it right there. It calcifies your pineal gland, which regulates your melatonin production and your hormones. It can cause brittle bones and thyroid issues, and the list just goes on and on. If you do your research, it’s right there — black and white,” she said.

The Harvard study Milz referenced was published in 2012. In a meta-analysis, researchers from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and China Medical University in Shenyang for the first time compiled the results of 27 studies of intelligence tests in fluoride-exposed

Please see Fluoride, page 9 Fluoride,

from p. 1

children, 25 of which were done in China, because at that point not many studies on fluoride neurotoxicity had been published in U.S. medical journals. The study found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children.

“On average, children with higher fluoride exposure showed poorer performance on IQ tests,” a media statement from Harvard researchers Anna Choi and Philippe Grandjean stated. “Fluoride released into the ground water in China in some cases greatly exceeded levels that are typical in the U.S… All but one of the 27 studies documented an IQ deficit associated with increased fluoride exposure.

“These results do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S. On the other hand, neither can it be concluded that no risk is present. We therefore recommend further research to clarify what role fluoride exposure levels may play in possible adverse effects on brain development, so that future risk assessments can properly take into regard this possible hazard.”

Milz felt the city should not be putting fluoride in its water if some city residents did not want it. She pointed out that if the city were to stop fluoridation, people could still choose to get fluoride through toothpaste; fluoridated beverages like tea, certain soft drinks, and juices; and supplements.

“I have granddaughters that are at my house all the time and they drink our RO (reverse osmosis) water, but if I give them a bath, then fluoride can affect them because skin is our largest organ. In my opinion, children are our greatest asset. Have you ever thought about offering supplements, fluoride or non-fluoride, if families ask for it — kind of like the health department does with the Seal-A-Smile? And if you don’t view this as an option, what option will you give for those of us who have done our research and prefer not to ingest or bathe in fluoride?” she finished.

Loyal resident Ken McEwen also spoke. He referenced a National Toxicology Program (NTP, part of the National Institutes of Health) systematic review of the scientific literature available on the association between fluoride exposure and neurodevelopment and cognition. The NTP review concluded, with moderate confidence, that higher levels of fluoride exposure, such as drinking water containing more than 1.5 mg/L, are associated with lower IQ in children. The National Institutes of Health website did give the caveat that “The NTP review was designed to evaluate total fluoride exposure from all sources and was not designed to evaluate the health effects of fluoridated drinking water alone. It is important to note that there were insufficient data to determine if the low fluoride level of 0.7 mg/L currently recommended for U.S. community water supplies has a negative effect on children’s IQ.”

McEwen also quoted from a USA Today article from April 10 discussing fluoride.

“‘The National Institutes of Health acknowledged that there may be concerns that pregnant women and children may be receiving unsafe levels of fluoride from a variety of sources, including treated public water, water added to the foods, beverages, teas, toothpastes, floss, mouthwash’ — you think about how much you drink around here, just in your home water, and if you take off, you’re visiting three or four different cities — getting coffee, getting pop. It’s filtered water, but the fluoride is not filtered out of that water wherever you go, if it’s fluoridated in that city.

“‘Kennedy has endorsed claims that fluoride is behind a host of health conditions, from ADHD and hypothyroidism to lowering IQs… In speaking to reporters, he said adding fluoride to water was clearly doing harm and was undermining freedom of choice.’” McEwen also said it was not known how fluoride reacted with medications and other supplements.

Another Loyal resident referenced a study released in 2024 that was funded by the U.K. Department of Health. This study analyzed the dental insurance records of 6.4 million adults in England and found that fluoridation resulted in 2% fewer cavities. According the Fluoride Action Network, this study was intended to inform policymakers of what to expect for future dental and economic outcomes from the current plan to expand fluoridation to all of England. Currently, only 10% of England is fluoridated. The study found “exceedingly small” reductions in dental caries.

For fluoridation Brittany Mews, Clark County Health Department director and public health officer, read a letter from Dr. Maryann Forsell, who could not be there that night. Forsell is a dentist at Family Health Center of Marshfield, Neillsville, as well as an executive with the Central Wisconsin Dental Society and trustee with Wisconsin Dental Association Board of Trustees.

“I am writing to you as a concerned dentist and a strong advocate for public health, particularly in the area of dental health and dental care for our communities. I would like to present several compelling reasons why maintaining this practice (fluoridation) is essential for the wellbeing of our residents. Community water fluoridation has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of dental cavities in both children and adults. By adjusting the fluoride concentration in our water supplies to optimal levels, we can help prevent tooth decay, which is one of the most common and costly issues in our society. The CDC has recognized water fluoridation as one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century,” Forsell’s letter stated.

“Addressing misconceptions about IQ levels — there has been some concern about the potential effects of fluoride on children’s IQ levels. However, extensive research and reputable studies have consistently shown that fluoride at the levels used in community water fluoridation does not have a negative impact on cognitive development or intelligence. Reviews by the World Health Organization, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Institute of Medicine have all affirmed the safety and efficacy of fluoridated water. For example, a study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found no link between fluoride exposure in drinking water at the optimal 0.7 parts per million, not the higher levels — no association between fluoride and reduced IQ levels in children.

“Water fluoridation is an incredibly cost-effective public health measure. The cost of adding fluoride to the water supply is relatively low, especially when compared to the high cost of dental treatments or adding fluoride supplements.”

She referenced a CDC statistic which states that for every dollar spent on fluoride, an estimated $38 is saved in dental treatment costs.

“Water fluoridation is an equitable solution that reaches all members of the community, regardless of age, income or access to dental care.

“Personal experience — I’ve been practicing in Neillsville for the last six years, seeing patients from Loyal on a daily basis. I work for a federally qualified health center, seeing primarily Medicaid, underinsured, and uninsured patients. The need for dental care in Loyal is significant, as it is throughout the state and country. We simply cannot afford to remove this preventative measure that benefits everyone, regardless of socioeconomic status. We also have a severe shortage of dentists, dental hygienists, and other staff, throughout Clark County and surrounding. We cannot keep with the demand the way it is, and actions like you are considering will only make things worse.

“At the last meeting, proponents of removing fluoride said that those who want fluoride can obtain it other ways if they want to. This unfortunately is not the case, as the average cost of toothpaste is $6, which may not seem like a lot to you, but for many low-income individuals I see on a daily basis, this means choosing between having toothpaste or having dinner for their families. I hope you consider the struggles low-income individuals already experience, and consider that by removing fluoride from the water, you are adding another barrier to health for these individuals.

“Water fluoridation is a crucial step in promoting oral health, preventing diseases, and ensuring the overall wellbeing of our residents,” stated Forsell’s letter.

Mews also provided comments of her own. She said the council needed to be cautious when evaluating the information they were given, because not all studies are created equal and some online articles may not give a complete, accurate picture of the issue.

“I don’t have a lot to add… A lot of what I’m hearing is studies, quotes, and research — I just urge you to consider the evidence and information from your local experts. I’m not a dental expert; I’m a registered nurse, but I’m also a health officer who runs a dental program and have for 15 years in our county. There’s a lot of information. Research can be quoted online. You really have to look at, is it controlled? There’s different levels of study and it can be very confusing and there’s the potential for misinformation. So, I just really urge you to consider the testimonials I’ve shared in the past in the form of packets from the American Dental Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and a variety of other methods.”

Council decision The eight-member council includes two new members, Gwen Klevgard and Amanda Stephens, replacing Jenae Weyer and Kris Schultz. Klevgard and Stephens were installed at the reorganizational meeting which took place immediately before the council meeting.

“We have two new members and two members missing. Do we want to wait until the new ones get up to speed and we have everybody here?” said council member Tim Froeba.

Klevgard and Stephens said they had researched the issue already and were ready to talk about it. However, that still didn’t solve the issue of Greg Brock and Kayla Schar being absent.

“I would like to have all eight council members present because of the importance of this issue,” said council member Tom Bobrofsky.

“I agree. I would rather have the full council, because it’s a big thing,” said fellow council member Tim Froeba.

The council discussed either tabling the item until the June meeting, because Brock should be done coaching softball by then and able to attend; or just putting fluoridation on future agendas as a standing item, so they could discuss and potentially take action on it as soon as the full council was present. It was unclear which option the council picked. However, the public may watch future agendas to see if fluoridation is listed.

Loyal Common Council meetings take place the third Tuesday of the month at 6:30 p.m. Agendas are posted at the library, at city hall, in the TRG, and at the TRG office.

The council wants the public’s input on this issue. Go to loyalwi.com/contact_us.php for the contact information of the mayor and council members, or attend a future council meeting.